Design and Manufacture

2B [Rehab Bike]

2014

2099995

KINGSLEY IGBIKIMINABO

GROUP 12 | Glasgow University

1

Table of Contents

Introduction …………………………………….............................................................2

Project requirement …....................................................................................3

Conceptual designs

First conceptual design …………………………………………………………………..4

Second conceptual design ………………………………………………………………5

Third conceptual design ………………………………………………………………….6

Morphological analysis …………………………………………………………………………......7

Detailed design

Bike frame ………………………………………………………………………………………9

Bike fork ………………………………………………………………………………………..10

Wheels …………………………………………………………………………………………..11

Crank set and Pedals ……………………………………………………………………..12

Gear hub and Chain ……………………………………………………………………….12

Seat ……………………………………………………………………………………………….13

Handlebars …………………………………………………………………………………….14

Brakes ……………………………………………………………………………………………15

Brake levers and Gear shifters ……………………………………………………….16

FES Unit …………………………………………………………………………………………16

Peripherals …………………………………………………………………………………...17

Final bike design …………………………………………………………………………...18

Costing ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..19

Break even analysis ……………………………………………………………………….21

Project Evaluation

Gantt chart ……………………………………………………………………………………25

Team management ……………………………………………………………………….26

Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………..........27

2

Introduction

The course work for the design and manufacture class required that each group should design

a bike. This project was completed at the end of the term. The project allowed the students

to apply the different design ideas and skills taught in the course of the course into a real

world scenario. Some of the techniques applied includes morphological analysis, Gantt charts,

team management as well as working as a group. This project helped to instil in the students

the act of project management, and costing using break even analysis.

3

Project Requirements

The task delegated for our group was to design a Recumbent (rehab) bike, with a high

preference for ingenuity. During the design phase of this project, we were tasked to create

something that would be different from other rehab bikes. With every project, the primary

criteria is the age group of the end consumer. While being faced with this issue, a final

resolution for middle aged adults i.e. between 25 and 65 was reached. This age group was

chosen because younger adults below 25 might find it uncomfortable riding in this bike, while

people above 65 might also find it too difficult getting on and off this tricycle.

One of the unique qualities of this tricycle was the introduction of the Functional Electrical

Stimulation (FES) unit. This unit which would be explained later on in this report was the

outstanding feature of this bike. In addition to increasing performance of the bike, the

diameters of the wheels were adjusted so users could get on and off easily. Furthermore,

some parts of the bike such as the sit was made with a material that was light, cheap and

which could be easily replaced. Asides the FES unit, another innovation to this bike was the

pedals. This was designed in a way that the riders’ feet would not slip off the bike during use.

Most parts of our bike were made of Aluminium because it is readily available. However the

most important parts such as the frame, spokes and brake rotors were made of materials

such as stainless steel, and titanium because of their durability and strength.

The frame was made of stainless steel so that the bike would be tolerant to adverse weather

conditions. Commuter type tyres were chosen because of their firm grip and high resistance

to puncture. This was achieved by adding various thread patterns on the tyre and increasing

its width. This bike was an edited and a better version of the one assigned to the group. In

addition, the bike was designed in such a way that makes it easy for the user to make repairs

on it themselves without the need of a professional.

4

Conceptual Designs

First conceptual design

During the brainstorming phase of the design process, three conceptual designs were

considered.

This was the first conceptual design was that of an Upright bike as shown below. However, it

was decided that the sitting arrangement might result in back aches and spinal problems for

majority of the users. In addition, the pedals might also create discomfort in the limbs of the

end users. These were the major short comings of this conceptual design. Irrespective of the

fact that this bike was limited in some ways, the electronic board on the handle bars meant

the user could customize their exercise programs as it suites them. Furthermore, this bike was

easy to carry along which means that it could be stored away after use with little or no

difficulties. Other good qualities of the bike includes the magnetic resistance on the pedals

which makes it very easy to abruptly end an exercise program.

Figure 1: First conceptual design

5

Second conceptual design

With the short comings of the first conceptual design, modifications had to be made to the

upright bike to suit new specifications. Some of the modified items were changing the location

of the pedals and the sit so the rider would feel more comfortable on the bike. This new

readjustments made it easier for the rider to actively flex his/her paralysed limbs. The risk of

back aches and spinal problems were reduced but not completely eradicated with this new

concept. On the other hand, this new bicycle was also limited in some areas. One of such

limitation was that the rider would not be able to use this bike outdoors just as the upright

bike. What this means is that overall sales of this bike might be limited and the market

streamlined to only indoor users. However this bike was an improvement from the previous

concept in that, it had an adjustable sit which could be aligned either forward, backwards,

upward or downwards. This gives the user more flexibility and comfort while using this bike.

Figure 2: Second conceptual design

6

Third conceptual design

The major problems of the two conceptual designs above were comfortability, safety and

their limitations to indoor users alone. On the other hand, these bikes had electronic exercise

programs on the handle bars, magnetic resistance on the pedals, adjustable sits, they were

affordable and could easily be stored away after each use. With both advantages and

disadvantages juxtaposed, further research was carried out to design a bike that would be

affordable (although more expensive than the previous ones), comfortable, ability to be used

outdoors. With high expectations of resolving these issues, a third conceptual design was

produced. This was a tricycle, and the final design was based on the principles used in

designing this bike.

Figure 3: Third conceptual design

With the third concept produced, we set out to manufacture our bike. This design was

targeted at outdoor users and the alignment of the frame, wheels, sit and pedals made it a

comfortable design for the end user. However modifications were made on this bike, some

of which were the wheels, gears, pedals, chains, brakes and handle bars. A shock absorber

was added at the rear of the bike so the user would still be comfortable should the bike be

ridden on rocky roads. The overall weight of the bike was evenly distributed among the three

wheels. Having made the necessary adjustments on this conceptual design, a modified edition

and final conceptual design was produced as shown below.

7

Figure 4: Final conceptual design

Morphological Analysis

With every design project comes a planning phase. During our planning phase we did series

of trade-offs in order to get the best match for our design project. A morphological analysis

was one of the effective ways of applying the principles of engineering economics such as

scale of preference, opportunity cost in determining what should make it into the final design.

The morphological analysis is shown below:

Table 1: Morphological Analysis

Morphological Analysis - Rehab Bike

User Male Female Unisex

Age group 0-15 15-25 25-65 65+

Injury Knee injuries and surgery

Paralysis Heart problems Musculoskeletal disorder

Type Upright Exercise Recumbent Exercise Recumbent FES

Environment Use Indoor Outdoor Both

Terrain Flat Hilly Mountains Off-road

Distances Very short <5 km Average 5-20 km Long 20-45 km Very long >40 km

Product Life 1-4 yrs 4-6 yrs 6-10 yrs 10+ yrs

8

Morphological Analysis - Rehab Bike

Weather Conditions

Sunny Overcast Rainy/windy Stormy

Wheels 1 Front 1 Back 1 Front 2 Back 2 Front 1 Back 2 Front 2 Back

Wheel diameter 22’’ 20’’ 18’’ 16’’

Frame Steel alloy Aluminium Titanium Carbon Fibre

Brakes V type Mechanic Disk Hydraulic disk Hydraulic Rim

Pedals Platform (standard) Full foot pedal Toe-clip

Gear hub 3 speed 7 speed 8 speed

Chain Roller Drive Bushing Double flex

Energy Rechargeable Batteries

AC (if stationary) Solar Dynamo + Batteries

Suspension Rear Air sock Rear Spring Front

Gears No gear hub Internal gear hub External gear hub

Seat Material Mesh Solid Plastic Spandex Vinyl

Peripherals Flag Tail light Front light Horn

Use Multiple times a day Daily 3-5 times weekly Once weekly or less

Price Range £ 0-1000 1000-3000 3000-10000 10000+

Figure 5: Morphological Analysis

The highlighted items in blue made it to the final stage of this design project while the others

were ignored or modified. For the wheels, the design of a tricycle was maintained, however

the dimension was altered to suit the overall design of the bike. Furthermore, the estimated

life span of the bike was between 6-10 years at an average use of 3-5 times weekly.

9

Detailed Design

Bike Frame

The frame was the most important part of the bike. This is because on it, do all the other

components intersect. What this means is that, having a frame made up of a very weak

material might not be able to withstand the overall weight of the bike. With this is mind,

various materials were considered in the design of the frame. Such materials were Aluminium,

Steel, Titanium and Carbon fibre. Among these materials, titanium and aluminium would have

been a better choice because of their good strength to weight ratio. However, both of these

materials were relatively expensive and would increase the overall cost of the bike.

Aluminium on the other hand was a lighter, less strong material that could fatigue easily. With

the above limitations, a 25 CrMo4 (4130) Stainless Steel was selected. This is a steel made up

of materials such as carbon, silicon, manganese, chromium and molybdenum. The reason

stainless steel was selected amongst other materials was because of its strength and cost.

Steel is an alloy that is readily available. A rear suspension was added to the frame to support

the weight of the rider. In addition to the rear suspension, the frame has an expand and

retract mechanism that allows the rider to adjust the length of the tube. The rear of the frame

was designed in a triangular shape with the sole aim of supporting the weight of the rider.

Figure 6: Bike Frame

10

Bike Fork

The fork, which houses the front wheel was made of 4130 Stainless steel. A standard spacing

of 100mm was used.

Figure 7: Bike Fork

11

The Wheels

The diameters of the wheels on the original tricycle were 20”. However, because of the angle

of our frame and the general aesthetics of our design project, some modifications had to be

made on the wheels. This modification was adjusting the diameter of the front wheel to 16”.

The rims were made of Aluminium alloy because it is relatively cheaper than stainless steel,

and could easily be moulded into any desired shape. Clincher rims were preferred over

tubular rims, because they are much easy to install, maintain and replace. Reducing the

overall weight of the bike was also another reason why aluminium rims were chosen instead

of stainless steel, despite their lower strength. On the other hand, the spokes were made of

stainless steel. Stainless steel was chosen because of its high corrosion resistance, durability

and high strength ratio. The spoke material in addition to the number of spokes determines

how strong a wheel would be. With this in mind, 28 stainless steel spokes were chosen for

the front wheel while 32 were chosen for each of the rear wheels. It could be observed that

the number of spokes on the front wheel was lesser than on the rear wheel. This was because

the overall weight of the bike was concentrated at the rear and a stronger wheel needed more

spokes. Hence the decision. The size of the spokes and holes were of standard so that they

could easily be replaced.

Asides the number of spokes, rims and wheel diameter, the type of tyre was another design

issue that was considered. Commuter type tyres were preferred over road bike and mountain

bike tyres. This is because they are comfortable, durable, have a firmer grip and also a high

resistance to puncture. The firm grip helps prevent skidding while riding on smooth surfaces.

The high resistance to puncture is as a result of their wider thickness.

Figure 8: Rear Wheel

12

Crank Set and Pedals

The crank set and the pedals were made of Aluminium alloy. This was because of the light

weight of aluminium. In addition to that, full foot size pedals with straps were designed. This

pedals had heel support and were padded with foams. The heel support made it easier for

the rider’s feet to be fully secured while riding. In addition, a paralysed person may find it

difficult keeping their foot steady, hence the heel and strap support.

Figure 9: Crank set and Pedals

Gear Hub and Chain

Aluminium roller chain was selected. Furthermore, an internal gear hub was preferred instead

of a derailleur. This was because the internal gear hub offers the resilience to adjust the

resistance to lower ratios up to 0.527. Asides this, adding a derailleur to the bike would have

seemed ambiguous, considering the design of the rear end of the bike. Gear ratio of up to 8

was selected for this bike, which give the user more flexibility in designing how fast or how

slow they would like to ride. These ratios were 0.527, 0.644, 0.748, 0.851, 1.0, 1.223, 1.419,

1.615 respectively.

13

Figure 10: Gear hub and Chain

Seat

The design criteria for the seat was that it should be comfortable, adjustable and easily

replaceable. For this to be achieved, an Aluminium 6061 frame was selected because of its

lightweight and high corrosion resistance. For comfortablility and affordability, a mesh fabric

was selected and stretched over the aluminium frame. This material was selected because it

was light, cheap and could easily be replaced. The seat was wide, and could be adjusted in

any direction the user pleases for maximum comfort.

Figure 11: The Seat

14

Handlebars

The handlebars were made of Aluminium alloy frames with rubber grips. Aluminium frames

were selected because of the light weight, while the rubber grips were selected because

rubber is a good insulator of heat and relatively cheap as well. Another reason why rubber

grips were chosen was so they could be replaced easily. For the user to feel comfortable

steering the bike, the position, height and distance of the handlebars were designed to be

consistent with the positioning of the natural hand. What this means is that the user does not

have to make personal adjustments such as raising of hands, or leaning forward to drive.

Figure 12: Handlebars

Brakes

The choice of brakes was another issue the group encountered. After much deliberation and

research, V-brakes and Disk brakes were selected. The V-brake was installed at the front while

the disc brakes were installed at the two rear wheels. V-brake is a type of rim brakes which is

made up of a two rubber pads and an aluminium body. These rubber pads are pressed toward

the rim of the wheel each time the brake is applied. On the other hand, a disk brake is a metal

brake which is attached to the wheel hub, and also has a set callipers which are attached to

the fork of the frame of the bike. The selected disk brakes for this bike were made of Titanium

rotors and metal ceramic callipers. Disk brakes were chosen for the rear wheels because they

are effective in all weather conditions. In addition, since the weight of the bike is concentrated

at the rear, a brake with a high braking power like the disk brake was the more obvious choice

when compared to v-brakes. Although disk brakes are quite difficult to maintain, and

expensive to install, their advantages were well suited for our bike. In order to save cost, a v-

brake was attached to the front wheels instead of a third disk brake. Asides saving cost, it is

quite uncommon to have a disk brake attached to a 16” wheel. Furthermore, since the front

of the bike does not carry as much weight as the rear, there was no need to install a disk brake

on the wheels. On the contrary, v-brakes are easier to maintain, install and purchase, which

15

gives them an edge over disk brakes. However, their inefficiency in adverse weather

conditions was another reason why they were not installed on the two rear wheels too.

Figure 13: V-Brake (Front)

Figure 14: Disc-Brake (Rear)

16

Brake Levers and Gear Shifters

As a group, we opted for four brake levers because of the two disk brake attached to the bike,

one V-brake and an internal gear hub. Each of these levers controls an individual component

in the bike. One brake lever controls the front V-brake, while the other brake lever controls

one of the rear disk brakes. On the other hand, the gear hub and the other disk brake are both

controlled by each gear shifter respectively. The brake shifters can also act as parking brakes.

The pulling in of the shifters, activates the disk brakes, which in turn puts the bike in a state

of rest. On the contrary, extending the shifters puts the bike in a travel mode. These brake

shifters and levers can also act as parking brakes.

Figure 15: Brake Shifters and Levers

Functional Electric Simulation (FES)

This is the outstanding feature of our bike that makes it different from every other recumbent

bikes. FES technology becomes very useful in users with neurological related injuries. FES

technology involves using well refined computer and sensor technology to stimulate

paralysed muscles of the body. Electrodes are attached to the precise leg muscles. The

muscular stimulation is in phase with the motion of the pedals. The amount of muscle

stimulation is regulated by the FES unit. The pedals begin rotation at the thrust of a button,

while the time required for each muscle to be stimulated and the amount of stimulation is

calculated by the system. When this happens, the right stimulation impulses are sent to the

electrodes, which in turn creates a fluent cycling and improved muscles. This stimulation is

what strengthens the muscles, improves bone density & blood circulation, eases spasms.

Asides being integrated into the bike, the FES unit can be detached and used on its own

without being physically attached to the bike. This feature allows users who are new to the

technology to get used to it before integrating it into the bike. The FES unit is a reliable and

efficient way of activating the legs or arm muscles of a paralysed user.

17

Figure 16: The FES Unit

Peripherals

Front and tail lights were added to the bike. These components made it possible for the bike

to be used at night, should the user decide to. In addition, a personal locator beacon was

added to the bike, just in case the user or the bike gets missing. Furthermore, a horn was also

added to create awareness and clear traffic. The group decided to add these extra features

to make the bike stand out amongst other competitors in the market, and make it more

appealing to customers.

Figure 17: Peripherals

18

Final Bike Design

With all the modifications and final assembly of the individual components, a final render was

made.

Figure 18: Final Bike Render

19

Costing

During the research and design stages of the project, individual members of the group

provided information on the cost of their parts. The overall costing in addition to the brake

even charts were done for number of 10 and 100 bikes respectively.

Table 1: Cost of Materials

Part Info Quantity Unit Price

Total

Frame Rear tube 500mm

1 20 20 48.3mm od x 2.5mm wall Stainless Steel Tube Grade 304

supplied dull polished.

Front tube 1m

1 25 25

Rear support

3m

1 30 30

Rear axle 2m

1 20 20

Fork 1 60 60

Rim 16’’ 1 15 15

Tyre 16’’ 1 10 10

Rim 20’’ 2 30 60

Tyre 20’’ 2 15 30

Front spokes 28 0.306667 8.586676 14g Stainless Steel Plain Gauge Spokes & 12 mm Brass Nipple

128 or 130mm

alternative £1.14

Rear spokes 32*2 64 0.306667 19.626688 same as above 170mm

Hub front 1 50 50

Hub rear 2 25 50

V-brake 1 20 20

Crankset 1 80 80

Chain 1 10 10

Pedals 2 40 80

Internal Gear Hub

1 120 120

Disk brakes (rotors,

callipers and levers)

2 60 120

Brake Pads Pairs 2 10 20

20

Handle bars 1 40 40

Handle grips 2 8 16

Brake cables 3 5 15

Shifters 2 32 64 Shimano Dura-Ace 7900 10Sp Bar End Shifters

Seat (frame) price for 4000mm

1 10 10 7/8”od x 16swg wall Aluminium Tube // 22.22mm outside

diameter x 1.6mm wall

Seat (fabric) kg 2 5 10 Nylon spandex

12V Li-ion battery

1 25 25

FES Unit 1 2000 2000

FES Sensor 1 20 20

Suspension 1 60 60

Sear/frame connector

1 5 5

Light set 1 20 20

Personal Locator Beacon

1 120 120

Horn 1 10 10

TOTAL 3263.213364

21

Breakeven Analysis

In addition to the general costing of materials and discounts, a breakeven analysis was done.

This breakeven is a method used by various organisations to measure the amount of profit

that would be generated from any given product.

It involves a mixture of variable costs i.e. costs that change with respect to the quantity of

production, and fixed costs i.e. costs which do not change with production quantity. The

breakeven point is the point at which the business neither makes profit nor losses. The break

even selling price for buying raw materials for ten bike and one hundred bikes was

determined using the work cost price (WCP) method.

Table 3 shows the break even selling price using the raw material cost for a bulk-buying ten

bikes. The group estimated that a total of 30 hours would be needed per week for the bike to

be produced. An hourly rate of £6.31 was estimated for a bike to be fully assembled. The total

labour cost for the bike was estimated to be £189.3. A small cost for design materials was

included for obtaining relevant standards and other documentation. From table 4, the works

material cost was reduced as a result of the percentage discount for bulk purchase. The final

selling price of the bike was estimated using the formula below:

𝑆𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒 = (𝑊𝐶𝑃 + (𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛

𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑦)) × 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑂𝑣𝑒𝑟ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑑 + 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡

While comparing both chart 1 and 2, it was observed that after selling 24 bikes at the cost of

£6400, a breakeven point was reached. On the other hand, a breakeven was attained in chart

2 after the sale of 16 bikes, which each unit being sold for £5677. It was observed that with

the recent completion in the market for bikes like the one assigned in this project, reducing

the selling price also encouraged customers to purchase it. With this in mind, the team

decided to stick with the selling price of £5677 in order to achieve the goal of selling about

100 bikes

22

Table 3: Breakeven Chart without 20% discount for Bulk buying

Rate £/hour Hours hr Cost £ Overhead rate %

Total £

Works Labour 6.31 30 189.3 225 425.925

Works Material 3263 130 4241.9

0

WCP 0 4667.825

Design Cost 60 250 15000 225 33750

Design Materials 5000 130 6500

Cost of Design 40250

Commercial overhead

125 125 125 125

Profit 400 400 400 400

Quantity 10 100 1000 10000

Selling price 11266.03125 6737.90625 6285.09375 6239.8125

Selling price 6400

23

Table 4: Breakeven Chart 20% discount for Bulk buying

Rate £/hour Hours hr Cost £ Overhead rate %

Total £

Works Labour 6.31 30 189.3 225 425.925

Works Material 2610.4 130 3393.52

0

WCP 0 3819.445

Design Cost 60 250 15000 225 33750

Design Materials 5000 130 6500

Cost of Design 40250

Commercial overhead

125 125 125 125

Profit 400 400 400 400

Quantity 10 100 1000 10000

Selling price 10205.55625 5677.43125 5224.61875 5179.3375

Selling price 6400

24

Graph 1: Break Even Chart without the 20% Discount Bulk buying

Graph 2: Break Even Chart with the 20% Discount for Bulk Buying

0

175000

350000

525000

700000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

Fixed Fixed + Variable Revenue

0

175000

350000

525000

700000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

Fixed Fixed + Variable Revenue

25

Project Evaluation

Gantt chart

After the initial outlay of the project, the tasks were assigned to every member of the group

depending on the proficiency of Solidworks. The initial tasks delegated and shared equally

amongst the group as shown in the chart below.

Chart 1: Initial Gantt Chart of the Project

At the early stages of having tasked assigned to various members of the group, the project

seemed to be going as planned. However, a few modifications were to the Gantt chart. These

new modifications were primarily due to the fact that some members of the group were

having a hard time working with Solidworks. One of such issues was dimensioning with the

wrong units. This meant that some parts were either too large or the small to fit in properly.

In addition, the final render took a little longer than usual. This was also as a result of the size

of the drawing file. In addition to design software delays, market research was also another

delay encountered in this project. This was because, the price of materials, and labour had to

be carried out by individual members of the group. With these modifications, a new Gantt

chart was created as shown below.

31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Task Done by F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F

Brainstorming All

Finalise Design All

Task allocation

Basic Dimensioning

SUBASSEMBLIES

Frame Chris

Fork Chris

Wheels Kingsley

Brakes Kingsley

Seat Lesego

FES + Battery Unit Lesego

Handle bars Scott

Steering mech Scott

Pedals Cammy

Gears Cammy

Chain Cammy

Material Selection All

ASSEMBLY

Nuts, bolts, fstnrs

Final assembly

Renders, anim Chris

26

Chart 2: Final Gantt Chart of the Project

Team Management

The successful completion of the project was a moment of accomplishment for every member

of the group. However this was achieved through a series of steps. During the planning phase

of the project, weekly meetings were held at various venues all over the school. Although

certain issues such as timetable clashes were experienced, they never did hinder the weekly

meeting of the group. Asides the weekly meetings, a face book group was created where

important facts were posted online and viewed by each member of the group. Irrespective of

these two approaches to effective management, a drop box folder was created so that files

from other members of the group could also be seen and adjusted according. This drop box

approach was considered as one of the most innovative ideas from the group. Finally CAD

sessions were held for members of the group who were having issues with CAD.

31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Task Done by F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M

Brainstorming All

Finalise Design All

Task allocation

Basic Dimensioning

SUBASSEMBLIES

Frame Chris

Fork Chris

Suspension Chris

Wheels Kingsley

Brakes Kingsley

Seat Lesego

FES + Battery Unit Lesego

Handle bars Scott

Steering mech Scott

Pedals Cammy

Gears Cammy

Chain Cammy

Material Selection All

ASSEMBLY

Nuts, bolts, fstnrs

Final assembly

Renders, anim Chris

27

Conclusion

This project went from conceptualizing a design and seeing through to the completion of it.

During the conceptualization phase, a particular age group was targeted, and the bike was

designed to suit the general lifestyle and exercise requirement of this age group. The

outstanding quality of this bike was the adoption of the FES unit which made the

rehabilitation process quite easy for the user. A break even chart was created, through which

the final selling price was estimated to be £6400. However, selling this same bike at £5677

would create a break even at 16 bikes for a bulk buying of 100 bikes. Finally, the coordination

and cooperation of each and every member of the group led to the conceptualization,

planning and final design of this rehab tricycle.